X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=FVW7L24aSjJRLsXfj14RS30Kx2I2AEVGSQweMAJda6c=;
	b=C0rhZeWuv6Bf0xHyBWZE+IRsc9hib+kPS1cyeD0SnYT9TErjMpefDcBWH+f2O70h7s
	lpS7Mb2OcALq90DoU0hVSrnqTPWT4hp7E1rage6OlnV7iyCGhgAUsN9WHLIh8523Ohn7
	WvKHmfLiRC2ulAYv0kNzcFdkqGElVv++MM7Rxvyon2M3fVcEihLszcl7kyXTKPJwE/PK
	nDWQ2/PTaYYO87IWnFPwr09rDB5KLYeNeHCG/FIEDLIxG0D5ISK03PqpGVmNOBx9D+EL
	iaGsCueWUqUj8MG3SpmoKhiVm89tTxy4MOhWiBWAQG5IJZyTC41TM5sJ404wzEhSAPNQ
	jjWg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
	:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=FVW7L24aSjJRLsXfj14RS30Kx2I2AEVGSQweMAJda6c=;
	b=cCeWoALsXTRQ3UoPIE+wOVET7RTZw+lG2FCtQ507t8IPTcNug/tMFMFGMTc+4US4Wz
	hhFnDxqYExRM+OLAZif53rSd2YQ1LAMcOaPiCOEmTkYkYBdzK13b31OC0093DFaoAPeD
	sO8IMi/6S3IiXtzIzgKJ6nrQQZnbjbGKC35q7ok59ZTAGGnSWFoIiwUk6YQX9x0njOJO
	73Pve9Ut94ZxVz/yYyn2mnbXpvX1O1kdVXRdmHWMbnkNpt3PyT/db5AMYABwhkAIWIx4
	gGUfJK7wWy4qQkdUJPmdxnEiliFrpzMP2MBKmeLKk+OkwurvkhgsU0KHIuOQNTU/TRPN
	4WCw==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AG10YOR58JUaHX+HR2xNhVLqrqys5EM+9cY039jA9tk0mTpfvsof59N3bonmrNJd5wAkcD/LkKKDd6BeoyWdZQ==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.28.48.131 with SMTP id w125mr24799917wmw.18.1453840147229;
	Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:29:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:	<E7D351BF-5BBB-41AC-B996-D5E27079A82C@noqsi.com>
References:	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601180756390 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601260416150 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<56A751EC DOT 8030402 AT iae DOT nl>
	<20160126124701 DOT 0d061912c7e078ced9d4e6cb AT gmail DOT com>
	<CANEvwqgs3YFnt7m8mA1DN6X2KdWbyr4zpXCVH321vDo1f7CyxA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201601261804 DOT u0QI4KEQ009550 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<E7D351BF-5BBB-41AC-B996-D5E27079A82C AT noqsi DOT com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:29:07 -0900
Message-ID:	<CAC4O8c-ZyNnCzCDHXkYYabSD4fG8vf+CKmhMycNJujGMPKzQDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] The nature of gEDA users
From:	"Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id u0QKTAtb014929
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:53 AM, John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 26, 2016, at 11:04 AM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> In this day and age to say blind/buried vias are not needed is ridiculous.
>>> The fact is ANY design that requires even one FPGA, custom ASIC or
>>> medium to large BGA needs blind/buried vias.
>>>
>>> This is factual and is easy vetted.
>>
>> If you can afford a custom ASIC, you can afford a top-end EDA package,
>> and a FAB that supports high-end features.
>
> Not true. In my world, I have to do much of the EDA work in the the proposal and feasibility study phases. Shoestring budgets, or no budget at all. A big company covers this by having lots going at once, but Noqsi Aerospace is a tiny company (3 people at the moment, the largest we’ve ever been). For our current biggest project, we went through two years of doing a lot of work for zero pay (but now it’s paying off). We couldn’t have afforded a top-end package during those years. We worked with a board designer who used Osmond PCB: not high-end, but it has blind and buried vias. He was much faster and more accurate than the big-$$ contractors who use the high-end software.
>
>
>>  Frankly, PCB is not a
>> high-end package and custom ASIC users are not our target audience.
>
> But gschem can do schematic capture for ASIC even though that’s not its target. The difference is that gschem doesn’t limit what you can draw. It’s quirky and limits *how* you can express what you need, but I’ve never found it incapable of expressing a circuit. It gives you a few crude primitives and a few ways to compose more complex objects from simple objects. A few layers of that, and you have a 6000 component mixed-signal ASIC.
>
> Pcb says to the user “my way or the highway”. Gschem says “live with my quirks, and I’ll help you do anything”.

Not true, I've just gone through the entire format carefully and pcb
actually has very little per-part or per-feature overhead.  It's about
as close to a paint program as it can be.  It can do lots of stuff,
though admittedly often in quirky ways, just like gschem.  Your major
gripe seems to be that you can't "draw" 3D or inter-layer features,
because their implementation is bolted onto the fundamentally layer
oriented design in a hard-wired way.  It's a true complaint but not
very useful, because adding 3D CAD would require a total rewrite with
buckets of additional complexity.

It's completely possible to go on adding features like blind vias
without a total rewrite.

Britton

- Raw text -